Does the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms protect people from government decisions that contribute to dangerous climate change?
Seven Saskatchewan residents and Climate Justice Saskatoon have filed an application to appeal their case to the Supreme Court of Canada following a divided Saskatchewan Court of Appeal decision that dismissed their climate case on September 10, 2026.
What happens next?
The Supreme Court does not hear every proposed appeal. It selects cases that raise issues of public importance or otherwise meet its criteria for review. The applicants are now waiting to hear the Court’s decision on the leave application. No Supreme Court hearing has been granted at this stage.
How you can support this work
Climate Justice Saskatoon is a grassroots, non-profit organization of concerned citizens fighting for a liveable future for everyone. Taking a constitutional climate case through the courts requires substantial organizing, legal research, expertise, and communications resources. We need your help.
We are accepting donations on behalf of all applicants to support this legal action. Contributions of any size are welcome. To donate, send an e-transfer to climatejusticeyxe@gmail.com. Please note we are not able to issue tax receipts.
Community members can also support this effort by staying informed as the case progresses and talking about it with others. Staying informed and helping others understand the case are simple but meaningful ways to support this work.
To learn more:
- Plan to attend our upcoming community conversation about this case on Thursday, November 26 at 6:30p.m. at Grosvenor Park United Church in Saskatoon
For media interviews and all other inquiries, please email climatejusticeyxe@gmail.com.
What is this case about?
The case, Dykstra v. Saskatchewan Power Corporation, questions the relationship between climate change, constitutional rights, and the accountability of governments and public institutions regarding decisions that affect the environment and public health. These questions extend far beyond Saskatchewan because they concern rights and freedoms protected by the Canadian Charter.
On March 31, 2023, Climate Justice Saskatoon and seven Saskatchewan residents, ranging in age from 15 to 80, launched a legal action against SaskPower, the Crown Investments Corporation of Saskatchewan, and the Government of Saskatchewan.
The case challenged two aspects of provincial electricity and emissions policy:
- Expansion of natural gas-fired electricity generation: The applicants challenged government action to approve, construct, and operate the Great Plains Power Station in Moose Jaw and the Aspen Power Station near Lanigan. They argue that the resulting greenhouse gas emissions contribute to dangerous climate change and infringe their Charter rights.
- Provincial greenhouse gas emissions regulations: The applicants also challenged Saskatchewan’s emissions-reduction regulations for electricity producers, arguing that the regulations did not require any actual reductions during the compliance periods from 2018-2026.
Decisions such as these should be made with Charter rights in mind. This includes section 7, which protects the rights to life, liberty, and security of the person, and section 15, which guarantees equality rights.
What have the courts decided so far?
A preliminary hearing took place at the Court of King’s Bench on October 4, 2024, where the Province argued that the case should not proceed to a full trial.
The Court agreed with the Province. In a judgment released on October 10, 2025, it struck the claim before it could proceed to trial. As a result, we were unable to present evidence or argue the merits of our case.
See the Saskatchewan Court of King’s Bench decision for further details.
Dykstra v Saskatchewan Power Corporation, 2025 SKKB 175 (CanLII), <https://canlii.ca/t/kg6cz>
An appeal hearing at the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal took place on April 17, 2026. On September 10, 2026, the Court of Appeal released its decision dismissing the appeal, stating that the issues raised are not justiciable, meaning they are not matters for the courts to decide.
In other words, Saskatchewan courts don’t want to talk about how the Province is contributing to the existential threat of human-caused climate change.
While the majority of the three-judge Court of Appeal panel concluded that the case could not proceed, Justice Drennan dissented in part. Justice Drennan agreed that part of our case should be dismissed. However, she thought the portion of our Claim about emissions reductions was justiciable and met the bar required to survive the motion to strike.
See the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal decision for further details.
Dykstra v Saskatchewan Power Corporation, 2026 SKCA 99 (CanLII), <https://canlii.ca/t/kn5h3>
Why this case matters across Canada
Climate change affects communities across Canada. Extreme heat, wildfire smoke, drought, and flooding affect people’s health, safety, and overall well-being.
There is no question that humans are responsible for this crisis. Our federal and provincial courts have already acknowledged this:
- The Supreme Court of Canada, in its decision on the Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act reference case concerning the constitutionality of the consumer carbon charge, stated unequivocally:[para. 2] “Climate change is real. It is caused by greenhouse gas emissions resulting from human activities, and it poses a grave threat to humanity’s future. The only way to address the threat of climate change is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
“References re Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act, 2021 SCC 11
< https://decisions.scc-csc.ca/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/18781/index.do>, retrieved on 2026-11-08
- The Court of Appeal for Saskatchewan, in its decision on the Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act, stated:[para. 4] “The factual record presented to the Court confirms that climate change caused by anthropogenic greenhouse gas [GHG] emissions is one of the great existential issues of our time. The pressing importance of limiting such emissions is accepted by all of the participants in these proceedings.”
Reference re Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act, 2019 SKCA 40 (CanLII), <https://canlii.ca/t/j03gt>, retrieved on 2026-11-08
The protection of constitutional rights in Canada
This case raises fundamental questions about the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and whether Canadians can have their constitutional claims heard when government actions threaten their rights.
The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal’s decision has implications that extend well beyond this province.
There are three important issues that the Supreme Court of Canada could address:
- Can Canadians have their Charter claims heard?
When government actions or regulations violate Charter rights, should those claims be heard, or can they be dismissed because a court considers them too political?
A claimed Charter violation should generally be enough for a case to be heard by a court, provided it is grounded in a recognizable legal claim. Whether Charter rights have actually been violated is a separate question. That issue should be decided after the court hears the evidence and legal arguments at a full hearing on the merits.
Clarification on justiciability is important not only for climate litigation, but for all Canadians seeking to hold governments accountable for actions they believe violate their constitutional rights.
- Are Charter rights controlled by provincial governments?
The Charter establishes fundamental rights and freedoms that apply across Canada. Its protections should not depend on which province a person lives in or on the legislation a provincial government has enacted.
Saskatchewan courts have in effect ruled that certain Charter claims depend on provincial legislation. This would narrow Charter protections in Saskatchewan and could allow constitutional protections to vary from province to province. The Charter should continue to be understood as Canada’s supreme law and applied consistently throughout the country.
- Can international law and the best available science help courts?
Climate change is a global problem, and Canada has made international commitments to address it, including through the Paris Agreement.
International law and climate science can help courts understand and interpret Charter protections. They do not need to be written into provincial legislation before courts can use them as guides in interpreting constitutional rights. The Supreme Court of Canada has done this previously, and we believe Saskatchewan courts should do the same.
Why the Supreme Court's guidance matters
These questions are not limited to Saskatchewan’s electricity system or greenhouse gas emissions regulations. The answers could shape how courts approach constitutional rights, government accountability, and their own role in addressing complex public issues.
Importantly, the application for leave to appeal only asks the Supreme Court to decide only the issue of justiciability, not whether the Charter guarantees a right to a healthy environment or a stable climate. We are asking the Court to clarify the legal standards that determine whether our Charter claims can proceed to a hearing on the merits.
Rights of future generations
The younger applicants in this case, and the descendants of the older applicants, will experience the long-term consequences of decisions made today.
Government decision makers should weigh environmental harms — including dangerous climate change — alongside impacts on Charter rights and not just economic considerations.
Our environment is changing at an unprecedented rate. Decisions made today will shape the conditions future generations inherit.